World Prison NewsPost info (IF it doesn't belong in another PTO forum) about the prison system, prisoner support, criminal justice, etc., that you learn firsthand, through the media, from an inmate, or any other source. News can be local, state, Federal, or int'l.

Not true
Many cases have been to court of human rights and lost when the judge has said quote "in your case life will mean life"for example the Yorkshire ripper to name just one.

Regardless of what may be said "The Yorkshire Ripper", Peter Sutcliffe is still incarcerated and has no date for release,.Myra Hindley died in Prison it is likely Ian Brady will do the same.'
I am not talking about all prisoners but a very small minority for who will remain prisoners of their notoriety.
Thank you for your input.

__________________
"Do not judge me by my successes, judge me by how many times I fell down and got back up again." Nelson Mandela.

Who cares what they say about us? Because when I am with you I am standing with an army

Sorry, but... No sympathy for Manson Family members here. What they did was far beyond merely horrific. It was beyond human. I don’t even know how to describe what they did. I just don’t see forgiveness or mercy for the Manson Family.

I have to respectfully point out that if a human did it, it was not "beyond human." It's high time we, as humans, recognized what we humans are ACTUALLY capable of, good and bad. Not just pretend that because something is awful to us we can distance ourselves from it, and them, by saying "they" were acting "inhuman." A human does it, it is in the realm of humanity.

There is more to a release decision than just being 'Bibled up' or having a bunch of certificates to go with a substantial percentage of a sentence having been served. Brown's statement would seem to suggest that she has never truly accepted responsibility for her actions..."Both her role in these extraordinarily brutal crimes and her inability to explain her willing participation in such horrific violence cannot be overlooked and lead me to believe she remains an unacceptable risk to society if released."

She was easily led as a teenager and has failed to demonstrate why anyone would believe she is not still susceptible to Manson or anyone like him. Until she comes up with answers to those issues and that which was pointed out by Brown, parole is not a reasonable expectation.

There is literally nothing this woman can say to convince anyone of her remorse. What can she do beyond say sorry and show through her actions that she does have remorse? There are some of you who have clearly shown that there is absolutely zero that she can do. So what's the point?

If Leslie Van Houten was YOUR loved one, you'd want her out. Much like the loved ones of the victims would never want her released. It's all relative. I may feel very different if any of the victims had been my loved ones, admittedly. But as an outside perspective, I have no involvement or emotional investment with anyone involved, and I think she has served her time and then some. People change a lot from being a teenager to being an elder. I've done things at 19 I wouldn't want ANYONE to know about. We all have our demons. But I suppose you're all so perfect as you sit in judgment of someone else, you must have never done anything you're not proud of. How wonderful for you.

There is literally nothing this woman can say to convince anyone of her remorse. What can she do beyond say sorry and show through her actions that she does have remorse? There are some of you who have clearly shown that there is absolutely zero that she can do. So what's the point?

If Leslie Van Houten was YOUR loved one, you'd want her out. Much like the loved ones of the victims would never want her released. It's all relative. I may feel very different if any of the victims had been my loved ones, admittedly. But as an outside perspective, I have no involvement or emotional investment with anyone involved, and I think she has served her time and then some. People change a lot from being a teenager to being an elder. I've done things at 19 I wouldn't want ANYONE to know about. We all have our demons. But I suppose you're all so perfect as you sit in judgment of someone else, you must have never done anything you're not proud of. How wonderful for you.

But could you provide an explanation for how you allowed yourself to be IN the situation? That van Houten refuses to address that issue is obviously problematic.

I run into similar situations with prospective clients here in Texas. And if they cannot give reasonable answers when WE pose them, we KNOW the Board isn't going to buy into anything we put forward on the client's behalf. We tell those people to save their money and suck it up, hoping that they don't get the ten-year set-off that the Board now has available.

It isn't about 'sitting around in judgment,' but rather about pointing out that to many people fall into the trap of thinking parole is about taking a bunch of classes. But hey, what do the experiences of people who have been involved in decisioning for MANY years matter...it may be experience in a different State, but the elements that factor into a decision are going to be substantially similar no matter WHAT jurisdiction one happens to be voting a file.

There is literally nothing this woman can say to convince anyone of her remorse. What can she do beyond say sorry and show through her actions that she does have remorse? There are some of you who have clearly shown that there is absolutely zero that she can do. So what's the point?

If Leslie Van Houten was YOUR loved one, you'd want her out. Much like the loved ones of the victims would never want her released. It's all relative. I may feel very different if any of the victims had been my loved ones, admittedly. But as an outside perspective, I have no involvement or emotional investment with anyone involved, and I think she has served her time and then some. People change a lot from being a teenager to being an elder. I've done things at 19 I wouldn't want ANYONE to know about. We all have our demons. But I suppose you're all so perfect as you sit in judgment of someone else, you must have never done anything you're not proud of. How wonderful for you.

You are absolutely right. There is nothing anyone can say or do that will make me think she is a suitable candidate for parole. Her actions years ago are such that even if fully rehabilitated she has forever forfeited the ability to be in free society.

I think she HAS addressed it. She was unhappy at home, and under the influence of serious mind-altering drugs. Have you ever taken LSD? She has addressed this extensively, it's just not an answer anyone wants to hear, and it's the damn truth. I had done a lot of LSD as a teenager, and I can attest to how badly it can affect one's psyche and decision-making abilities. To people who have never made those decisions, they may think it sounds like a cop-out or an excuse, and it really isn't. It's a viable reason. Just because the general public doesn't think it's a reasonable explanation because they have no frame of reference whatsoever doesn't make it so. Drugs, in particular, hallucinogens, are powerful substances. Pair hallucinogenic drugs with depression, an impressionable teenage girl, and a cult-like figure like Charles Manson and it's pretty easy to understand what happened there.

I don't think anyone really thinks parole is about taking a bunch of classes. She's done more than that. She has proven through action that she is capable of living among us, in addition to taking classes. She actively shuns anyone who tries to write to her because of her notoriety. She isn't proud of the role she played. She has spent 40+ years explaining herself. At what point do you think she might get sick of saying the same things over and over....for 40 years?

Furthermore, the parole board, who do have YEARS of experience heard her arguments and recommended her for parole. Should they just all be fired? Because clearly their judgment means nothing and they don't know what they're doing. Or at least the governor seems to think so.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Nastyfacts For This Useful Post:

“The way that the parole was granted was just a dream come true,” said [Rich] Pfeiffer. “The commissioners went through everything and found that there was not item or one factor that could be considered against parole.”

Ultimately, the decision will be up to California Gov. Jerry Brown. Criminal defense attorney Steve Meister said it was unlikely that Brown would approve Van Houten’s release.

“I can guarantee that Jerry Brown is going to turn this recommendation down and find a way to keep her in prison,” Meister said. “No governor who wants to protect his or her legacy is ever, ever going to sign off on the freeing of a Tate-LaBianca killer. It just won’t happen.”

Pretty much sums up the way I see it, as well, and I think it's wrong.

In the UK there is no such thing as LWOP all prisoners have chance of parole.They are given a miminum time they must serve before they are eligible or for the criminal insane they must be deemed fit and no longer a threat to themselves or others however long that may take.

However we still have prisners who are never likely to be released as they pose a significant risk of reoffending or their crime is so heinous that its it would outrage the public if they were released.. A case in point is Myra Hindley the female accompliceof serial killer Ian Brady. Their crimes involved the abuction murder and torture of young children in the 1960s. When Myra Hindley came up for parole after serving many years behind bars.There was no question that she would ever reoffend but her crimes had outraged public decency to such an extent that she was not released and died in prison of cancer.In my opinion she deserved no less , but is it a fair system thats debatable.Would this member of the manson family reoffend,its highly unlikely but she is a prisoner now of her notoriety.

I think this pretty much sums up why she isn't being released and why it seems unlikely that she ever will.

Whoops - I just realized that miamac just basically said the same thing. I definitely agree this premise.

There is literally nothing this woman can say to convince anyone of her remorse. What can she do beyond say sorry and show through her actions that she does have remorse? There are some of you who have clearly shown that there is absolutely zero that she can do. So what's the point?

If Leslie Van Houten was YOUR loved one, you'd want her out. Much like the loved ones of the victims would never want her released. It's all relative. I may feel very different if any of the victims had been my loved ones, admittedly. But as an outside perspective, I have no involvement or emotional investment with anyone involved, and I think she has served her time and then some. People change a lot from being a teenager to being an elder. I've done things at 19 I wouldn't want ANYONE to know about. We all have our demons. But I suppose you're all so perfect as you sit in judgment of someone else, you must have never done anything you're not proud of. How wonderful for you.

Wow for someone who admits to having done stuff that you wouldn't want known, your pretty damned judgmental of others. If I was related to someone who committed such a heinous crime I don't think I'd want them out. I might be more forgiving, but in my opinion some people have no redeeming qualities, and never would I use being on dope an excuse for my actions. Like the drunk driver who kills a family on christmas too bad he's sorry after, just because someone is sorry it doesn't negate what they did. Big deal she was depressed lots of people are depressed they don't hurt other and if they do they should be locked up. Some crimes are never forgiven.

She has served her time +++ and she will continue to serve time. Im sure she is a very different person from the girl who committed these horrific crimes. BUT there are no excuses LSD doesnt make anyone do anything as myself and millions of others can attest...Charles Manson couldnt have had a hold on her if she wasnt partially open to it. Many people came and went through the group without being drawn into his spell. She did what she did took part in the slaughter(she stabbed Rosemary La Bianca 16 times) of no one knows how many people.
Has she changed without a doubt she has...is she a danger to society...as an eldery woman no...but there are people out here who see the 'family' as heroes could she influence them to carry on 'helter skelter' who knows and who would want to take the risk.

__________________Mrs Mroch
Just like the sunshine after rain
I'll come
To be with you will save the day
'Cos I know
When I'm with you again
You just steal my heart away

The Following User Says Thank You to Psychocandy For This Useful Post:

Brown will overturn it. Bruce Davis was granted parole by the board five times. All were overturned, four of them by Brown. Most recent was earlier this year. Brown has been very consistent in his belief that the Manson family members should never be released.

Van Houten sealed her fate during the trial when she laughed and sang and showed no remorse for what she had done.

From Wikipedia:During the sentencing phase of the trial, in an apparent attempt to exonerate Manson, Van Houten testified that she had committed a killing in which she was not in fact involved. She told a psychiatrist of beating her adopted sister, leading him to characterize her as "a spoiled little princess" and a "psychologically loaded gun", and was adamant that Manson had no influence over her thought processes or behavior. Van Houten also told the psychiatrist that she would have gone to jail for manslaughter or assault with a deadly weapon without ever meeting Manson. When her lawyer, attempting to show she felt remorse, asked if she felt sorrow or shame for the death of Rosemary LaBianca, Van Houten replied "sorry is only a five-letter word" and "you can't undo something that is done". In cross-examination, Van Houten aggressively implicated herself in inflicting wounds while the victim was living, and severely wounding the victim which severed the spine and might have been fatal by itself. She vehemently denied acting on instructions from Manson, and said a court-appointed attorney who "had a lot of different ideas on how to get me off" had told her to claim Manson ordered the killings.

The problem with the Wikipedia entry is that it endorses the idea that she was a puppet following the instructions of Manson. Manson' conviction was the most tenuous as he wasn't at either location. They needed the followers to help draw the line between Manson and what happened and he knew this, too. He was already very accomplished at legal liability. He instructed them to take as much responsibility as possible and to give no indication that he wanted any of it, talked about any of it, or requested any of it, let alone said when, where, or how.

The problem with the Wikipedia entry is that it endorses the idea that she was a puppet following the instructions of Manson. Manson' conviction was the most tenuous as he wasn't at either location. They needed the followers to help draw the line between Manson and what happened and he knew this, too. He was already very accomplished at legal liability. He instructed them to take as much responsibility as possible and to give no indication that he wanted any of it, talked about any of it, or requested any of it, let alone said when, where, or how.

That may be true, but one of the reasons that she has been denied release is that no matter what she says or who she blames or how much remorse she expresses, she has said exactly the opposite in the past under oath. And in a really disturbing manner.

I am not necessarily opposed to her release, but I don't see her as more deserving of it than a 19 year old gang member who got LWOP or the DP for committing a murder while under the influence of drugs and the gang leaders. It was only a series of unrelated SC rulings that allowed her to even be eligible for parole since she was initially sentenced to death and there was no LWOP at the time.

That may be true, but one of the reasons that she has been denied release is that no matter what she says or who she blames or how much remorse she expresses, she has said exactly the opposite in the past under oath. And in a really disturbing manner.

I am not necessarily opposed to her release, but I don't see her as more deserving of it than a 19 year old gang member who got LWOP or the DP for committing a murder while under the influence of drugs and the gang leaders. It was only a series of unrelated SC rulings that allowed her to even be eligible for parole since she was initially sentenced to death and there was no LWOP at the time.

Yes, Furman came along and took the Manson Family off death row. Yes, Furman dealt with racial disparity in death sentences, and that didn't apply here. Yes, they benefitted as a result of that and the combo of the idea of a life sentence being limited to life with parole. Yes, LWOP was not created until more than a decade after the entirety of death row in all death row States was given life in lieu of an unconstitutional death penalty.

As you note, it's irrelevant.

Now let's look at some concepts about the death penalty and women. Most women who got death under the old rule never actually faced death. Most, especially where the woman was part of a pair or group, got a lesser sentence either at trial (Charlie Starkweather case for example), or had their sentence reduced.

You can take a look at women murders and see a stark contrast with men. Women who are charged with first degree murder rarely face the death penalty. I mean rare in comparison to men facing death and men facing death is quite statistically rare to begin with, especially under the old death penalty (by old death penalty, I'm talking pre Furman, though these notions are statistics that I am just not looking up for this purpose). Among men it was so rare that male murderers in Iowa not facing death wrote a letter to the governor of the state, in that case Iowa, in support of the commutation of the Iowa death row (all male at the time) because the something like 200 men convicted of the same crime as the men on death row (something like 3-6 men at the time) didn't feel it was fair. All had been convicted of the same crime and a number of the lifers, something like 20 percent, were convicted of crimes just as or more heinous than the men on death row. It didn't work, but shows that even in the 1930's, the randomness and the small number of actual death sentences was notable.

But back to women. The number of women who face death penalty trials for first degree murder is even more minute per 100 murders.

So, we have a 19 year old, the youngest of an entire group of people with a charismatic leader and mind altering drugs involved - would she actually have found her ass in CA's gas chamber? No. She's a good looking, young girl. Manson's hold on the girls was extreme enough that he cut a swastika on his forehead and so did they. Why do I say this? Because good looking young girls under the thumb of men don't face death. With the noted exception of whatever her name was, the woman glamorized in the movie I Want to Live, good looking young women with men convicted of the same crime don't face death. Oh, and she's white, too. White women don't face death unless they have a ton of murders under their belt, they are clearly the masterminds, they aren't very attractive, they aren't young, and they aren't white.

As to anybody involved in the Manson Murders, there's never going to be a parole. Not in this political climate. Not with that notorious of a crime. Giving her parole would force the system to actually look at each of the other Manson murderer critically, and not through the lens of politics, but it's simply not going to happen in this political climate. It's a shame. But then, would they have peace if they were released? Fugate (see Charlie Starkweather) had to change her name before parole to try to ensure her privacy. Could that happen in this day and age?

As to any other LWOP or DP sentenced person - I don't think that those sentences are legitimate sentences. Should some people never be free again? Sure. Some people demonstrate through their actions inside that they are not ready for parole. Does this mean that if they turn their lives around in prison, divest themselves of gangs, addictions, etc, program, get degrees, etc, that they shouldn't be given a chance at freedom? Are we really doing our society a favor by never being able to recognize or deal with rehabilitation? What about the 12 year old charged as an adult with murder? SCOTUS has said they deserve a meaningful chance at parole and cannot serve LWOP or get death (two separate opinions more than a decade apart). Can we apply that to just about anybody?

Oh, 12 year olds serving an adult life sentence? Yes, it happens. Wisconsin automatically starts some crimes in adult court at age 12. You want to see a bunch of adults talking about how 12 year olds should serve adult sentences, take a look at the upcoming Slenderman trials in WI. One of the girls had just turned 12. 6th graders facing more than 60 years in prison because of a belief in the fictive Slenderman, the early onset of severe mental illness, and an attempted murder wherein the victim has not lost a semester in school. Please note I'm not advocating that the girls get off, but I am advocating that they should have started out and stayed in juvenile court along with mental health court. I'm also saying that girls who were "cute" when they believed in Santa just the year before, who had never been on a date, who had just started wearing training bras and had never menstruated are not adults.

But that's where women like the one in the OP's post get us. That and a bunch of other history. People don't see or remember the differences between a 19 year old and a 12 year old. People don't see the difference between a 19 year old under the influence of a charismatic older man and a 25 year old capable of living on her own.

Some of the many, many reasons to abolish the death penalty for good. And one of the few areas in American society that women are given preferential treatment, however insulting the reasons are. We are less culpable because we are seen as less intelligent and less capable then men of carrying out a violent crime, so the man must have tricked the impressionable and easily manipulated woman to do it. She can't be held fully accountable because she isn't that smart. Unless... she kills children. Nearly 50% of women on death row are there for killing a victim under the age of 19 (Source DPIC). Because women are not supposed to kill children. Men kill children too and it's despicable, but it isn't viewed the same way as when women do it.

But back to Van Houten. As you said, she isn't going anywhere for all of these reasons and more. And there is little point to these repeated attempt to win parole. Some of the arguments in favor of Marsy's law which passed in 2008 were the Manson families endless parade of parole hearings that cost taxpayers money and are hard on the victim's families. Because of that, parole denials in California can now be up to 15 years. Those 15 year parole denials have yet to be used on Van Houten or Davis, but they have been used for many other lifers. So they get on TV and are put on a never ending roller coaster of hope when the outcome has long been decided, and the consequences go to the nameless faceless inmates whose chances of parole are lower because people are sick of hearing about the Manson family.

Actually, that would be an argument in favour of the death penalty, not against, when an individual is not supposed to ever get out.

For everybody else, the maximum duration of incarceration should be capped, because historically, life in prison was not supposed to last very long. It was understood that, while that may not be impossible, surviving in an institution such as prison for 46 years or longer was fairly unlikely.

For instance, despite all its shortcomings, the jail and prison medical system is at least trying hard to prevent tuberculosis (not that it doesn't still occur). Once upon a time, tuberculosis (and if not, some other illness) was likely to limit the duration of a "life" sentence.

That's why life or several decades in prison simply do not mean the same thing as at the time when such penalties were first established, so the maximum duration should be shortened by law, since nature can no longer be counted on to do it. There was never a guarantee, one way or another, but now there is a greater chance of actually surviving for a long time.

Death isn't an argument against LWOP. People spend decades on death row as well.

I personally think that people need to treat these things as different. LWOP is different than death.

Nature always terminates the length of a sentence. There have always been people in prison who have been there for decades, despite TB (noting that the vast bulk of TB cases are institution based).

Statistically, prison still limits your life, but that's just an average statistic used by life insurance companies to prevent salesmen from selling to prisoners who have been exposed to a ton of things, not just TB, all of it limiting.

The thing of it is there are always people who have served decades on a life sentence. Such sentences should always be subject to review because nobody should feel like their life has been thrown away. No corrections officers should feel like a prisoner faces no consequences for actions. The ultimate goal is always getting out, but it is part of a spectrum.

Unfortunately, we don't have the services necessary for some rehabilitation. But this is far beyond rehabilitation of a person. This case is about the rehabilitation of a person's reputation. There is nothing that can be done to make anybody want to risk their political reputation on the rehabilitation of a Manson. And so we are stuck - Van Houten always seeking to take the next step in rehab, the system unable to grant it to her.

Is it a waste of money? Dunno. I think the record of those hearings forms something important for research in terms of understanding these sorts of cases. And it is a record of Van Houten's progress despite the knowledge that she will never get out.